Dublin Airport - Terminal 2

dubhthach · 24-06-2010 8:17am

Typical short-term Irish thinking to say "oh passenger numbrs are now lower then two years ago they shouldn't have built Terminal2" bah!

Terminal 1 was built in the 70's just before the second oil crisis. It's been in use for over 30years. No reason to think Terminal2 won't be in use for next 30-40years either. However most decision making in this country is based around "when is the next election & how does it help me get votes"

oddiot · 24-06-2010 9:23pm

korpy wrote: »

where are these jobs advertised?

By following the links on their website, they're on:
http://terminal2jobs.jobsmarket.ie/

korpy · 25-06-2010 11:16am

oddiot wrote: »

By following the links on their website, they're on:
http://terminal2jobs.jobsmarket.ie/

Thank you

irishdub14 · 25-06-2010 9:11pm

Well, it's official...

Aer Lingus to base Dublin operation in T2
Friday, 25 June 2010

Aer Lingus has announced that it will transfer its Dublin Airport operation to Terminal Two when the new terminal opens in November.

However, Aer Lingus warned it would review the decision if differential pricing is introduced to T2.

The move by Aer Lingus will mean that passengers will be able to avail of the US Customs and Border Protection facility.

These facilities are already in operation in Shannon Airport and will allow departing passengers to the US to fully clear US immigration, customs and agriculture controls.

Aer Lingus also confirmed that it is to transfer operations from its head office building to Hangar 6.

The DAA is to pay Aer Lingus €10.55m over ten years for the leasehold interest on the head office site.

It will also provide services and facilities to the value of €11.6m to Aer Lingus over the same period, bringing the total value of the deal to €22.05m.

RTE NEWS

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0625/aerlingus.html

But if there moving all their services to T2, does that mean T1 will basically become the Ryanair terminal?

Heartbreak Hank · 25-06-2010 10:05pm

Is there anyway that Dublin could market itself as a gateway hub airport for Europe-America travellers? Surely the fact that it is the most westerly large airport in Europe would mean that it is an ideal candidate?

I would feel that the combination of trans Atlantic and low cost European carrier options in one Airport would also suit the more independent traveller.

Is there any way that the DAA or the Airlines can market themselves as the direct route transfer to Europe?

It really aggravates me flying to Amsterdam/London etc before crossing the Ocean.

murpho999 · 25-06-2010 11:52pm

Heartbreak Hank wrote: »

It really aggravates me flying to Amsterdam/London etc before crossing the Ocean.

Why do it then? Aer Lingus and American Airlines fly from Dublin and you can easily get a connecting flight in the US!

There is a reason that London/Amsterdam are bigger hubs....larger populations and economies.

Sulmac · 26-06-2010 12:00am

London benefits from being a large city with a large economy and Amsterdam from being in a very central position in Europe.

If Dublin Airport gets its second runway it could become a rather attractive airport for transatlantic flights (especially to the US, given the fact full Immigration and Customs will be done in T2).

Wasn't there talk of Air India switching its European hub from Frankfurt to Dublin?

irishdub14 · 26-06-2010 10:44am

Sulmac wrote: »

London benefits from being a large city with a large economy and Amsterdam from being in a very central position in Europe.

If Dublin Airport gets its second runway it could become a rather attractive airport for transatlantic flights (especially to the US, given the fact full Immigration and Customs will be done in T2).

Wasn't there talk of Air India switching its European hub from Frankfurt to Dublin?

Yes there was talk and actually the decision still hasn't been made:

March 23, 2010

Air India is sending a technical evaluation team to Dublin as part of its effort to move its European and U.S hub away from Frankfurt Airport in Germany.

This follows the visit of its senior management team to Dublin last month. The decision to shift from Frankfurt will be made this summer, according to a senior official. The carrier is also looking at partnering with Ireland’s national carrier Aer Lingus for connecting flights to Europe.

Copenhagen is believed to be another contender.

Dublin’s new Terminal 2 is due to open in November, and Air India is expected to be one of the first tenants of the Dublin Airports Authority, which is trying to cope with a fall in traffic.

“All our decisions need to consider cost effectiveness,” Air India Chairman and Managing Director Arvind Jadhav told The DAILY last month.

While economics is a major consideration, the Irish capital’s airport enablews U.S.-bound passengers to clear customs and immigration prior to arrival, thus avoiding long lines. This will be a major plus when AI makes it decision, a senior Irish official says.

AVIATION WEEK

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?topicName=india&id=news/avd/2010/03/23/08.xml&headline=Air%20India%20Eyes%20Moving%20Hub%20To%20Dublin

It would be amazing to see lots of Air India planes in Dublin! Fingers crossed! Although I cant see any benefits from moving from a major German airport to an Irish airport.....

myhead · 26-06-2010 11:14am

Can someone please explain the amazing charges this airline adds on, Me thinks it will only get worse with this shineee new terminal and we shall have to pay for it in the end:eek:

chopperreid · 26-06-2010 11:19am

i worked in T2 and i must say when you see it compared to the old T1 it is impressive and something to be proud of, it has more of a high end shopping centre feel to it.

Amtmann · 26-06-2010 11:48am

myhead wrote: »

Can someone please explain the amazing charges this airline adds on, Me thinks it will only get worse with this shineee new terminal and we shall have to pay for it in the end:eek:

Hi there. That question is for a different forum really (Commuting & Transport). This thread is about Terminal 2, not Ryanair.

muffy · 26-06-2010 12:28pm

Seriously impressive building, get a little shiver every time I drive under it!
Glad to see we have something to be proud of for people to see when entering the country...
Getting the job application in!

Bodan · 27-06-2010 2:52pm

thanks to tearbringer for the photo

jd · 27-06-2010 7:12pm

irishdub14 wrote: »

Yes there was talk and actually the decision still hasn't been made:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?topicName=india&id=news/avd/2010/03/23/08.xml&headline=Air%20India%20Eyes%20Moving%20Hub%20To%20Dublin

It would be amazing to see lots of Air India planes in Dublin! Fingers crossed! Although I cant see any benefits from moving from a major German airport to an Irish airport.....

If clearance is done in Ireland, doesn't it offer the opportunity to fly to cheaper domestic airports in the states?

Sulmac · 27-06-2010 7:49pm

jd wrote: »

If clearance is done in Ireland, doesn't it offer the opportunity to fly to cheaper domestic airports in the states?

One benefit, there could be flights to LaGuardia in New York, or Reagan National just outside Washingon DC - both airports closer to the city centres than the main airports (JFK, Newark, Dulles and Baltimore-Washington).

Of course, this also means Ryanair-type situations with flights to "New York (Providence)" and the like...

wetling · 27-06-2010 8:31pm

I think the daily mail headline should read 'T2: Judgment day' when it opens - it can then go on to say how airfares will double because of it and all job there will go to poles

FreudianSlippers · 29-06-2010 8:38pm

murpho999 wrote: »

Why do it then? Aer Lingus and American Airlines fly from Dublin and you can easily get a connecting flight in the US!

There is a reason that London/Amsterdam are bigger hubs....larger populations and economies.

Their destinations, schedules and prices are reason enough to avoid transatlantic flights from Dublin. I recently started flying to the Western USA through LHR and I get there cheaper and on better planes (United/American/AerLingus are not providing competitive services when compared with Air Canada, Virgin, BA, etc.).

I would gladly cut out an extra stop and fly from Dublin, but it is impossible to get to the West Coast and the prices are high. Making Dublin a bigger hub is possible but we need to entice more airlines to come for a reason (hub to Europe) and that will involve longer runways to accommodate the newer planes.

Locker10a · 29-06-2010 8:51pm

wetling wrote: »

I think the daily mail headline should read 'T2: Judgment day' when it opens - it can then go on to say how airfares will double because of it and all job there will go to poles

Are you for real ? :eek:

Cool Mo D · 29-06-2010 11:05pm

OisinT wrote: »

Their destinations, schedules and prices are reason enough to avoid transatlantic flights from Dublin. I recently started flying to the Western USA through LHR and I get there cheaper and on better planes (United/American/AerLingus are not providing competitive services when compared with Air Canada, Virgin, BA, etc.).

I would gladly cut out an extra stop and fly from Dublin, but it is impossible to get to the West Coast and the prices are high. Making Dublin a bigger hub is possible but we need to entice more airlines to come for a reason (hub to Europe) and that will involve longer runways to accommodate the newer planes.

Really?

I flew to the USA last summer, and by FAR the cheapest way to do it was to use a US carrier that flies to Dublin (Delta in my case, for €230 one way including all taxes), and connect from one of their US hubs to any onward destination - I flew Dublin - New York - Chicago, and with all immigration done in Dublin it was pretty painless. I would say that getting immigration out of the way in Dublin compensates for the hassle of changing flights in the US too.

Going through London was another option I looked at, and it was way more expensive with Virgin and BA - more expensive than Aer Lingus. Aer Lingus also allow you to book through flights with a change in the states to US airline.

FreudianSlippers · 30-06-2010 12:19am

I was talking about West Coast USA or Canada. Getting to Chicago or NYC is easy on EI direct. Schedule is still not great though and I'm not a big Delta fan.
Not to mention that EI has no real partners anymore and I was informed last week that they will not be checking bags through anymore unless everything is booked through their website (either jetblue which are almost all redeye or united which is usually cheaper on united's website).

I fly a lot to the USA - about 3-4 roundtrips to W.Coast and 1-2 to Chicago or NYC and on the past 2 years AerLingus has been awful and I've been happier going through LHR (at least to W.Coast - I still go from Dublin to NYC and Chicago)

darkman2 · 08-07-2010 3:22pm

http://www.dublinairportauthority.com/TDA/FAQs/introt2.html

A "tour" of the terminal.

myhead · 08-07-2010 5:17pm

Furet wrote: »

Hi there. That question is for a different forum really (Commuting & Transport). This thread is about Terminal 2, not Ryanair.

Cmon forget about the shiney architecture and worry that it will be empty unless we can tempt a major airline to use dublin as a hub. Its madness with a decrease in passengers using dublin airport to build this. The decrease is not helped by the government and airport duties, and yes (Ryanair) boss Michael o Leary is 100% right in this matter. We shall pay for it in the end!

runway16 · 08-07-2010 6:33pm

myhead wrote: »

Cmon forget about the shiney architecture and worry that it will be empty unless we can tempt a major airline to use dublin as a hub. Its madness with a decrease in passengers using dublin airport to build this. The decrease is not helped by the government and airport duties, and yes (Ryanair) boss Michael o Leary is 100% right in this matter. We shall pay for it in the end!

The same mentality that had a 2 lane M50 - And it is Ryanair that is actually responsible for much of the drop by cutting capacity in the 1st place. The current terminal is still at capacity. The airport is still constrained at many times in terms of stand availability. Most of it is old and past it - it badly needed new development, at teh very least to take pressure off much of the old building so it can be torn down (which Pier A and B badly need). The US flights are using terrible immigration facilities that are not fit for purpose. There isnt enough passport control capacity in Pier B and you cant move it anywhere else because that is already full.

Only in Ireland would people actually argue against having capacity to grow. And it will grow again... believe it or not.

O'leary is a ****wit who only skews everything to favour his companies needs at that specific moment in time. For years he banged on about "calcutta" type facilities... remember?

myhead · 08-07-2010 11:02pm

runway16 wrote: »

The same mentality that had a 2 lane M50 - And it is Ryanair that is actually responsible for much of the drop by cutting capacity in the 1st place. The current terminal is still at capacity. The airport is still constrained at many times in terms of stand availability. Most of it is old and past it - it badly needed new development, at teh very least to take pressure off much of the old building so it can be torn down (which Pier A and B badly need). The US flights are using terrible immigration facilities that are not fit for purpose. There isnt enough passport control capacity in Pier B and you cant move it anywhere else because that is already full.

Only in Ireland would people actually argue against having capacity to grow. And it will grow again... believe it or not.

O'leary is a ****wit who only skews everything to favour his companies needs at that specific moment in time. For years he banged on about "calcutta" type facilities... remember?

Your simply not understanding, lets be realistic unless we have the people to fill your building its pointless. its cart before the horse as usual in this country. building before planning. lets see how it pans out, I wish it to work out but im not holding my breath.:rolleyes:

KCAccidental · 09-07-2010 12:13am

myhead wrote: »

its cart before the horse as usual in this country.

in an Infrastructural sense Ireland has NEVER been cart before the horse.

the horse has usually bolted by the time the cart is built in this country.

munchkin_utd · 09-07-2010 9:55am

myhead wrote: »

Your simply not understanding, lets be realistic unless we have the people to fill your building its pointless. its cart before the horse as usual in this country. building before planning. lets see how it pans out, I wish it to work out but im not holding my breath.:rolleyes:

wrong

what ireland normally does is presume that nothing will change and when EVERYTHING goes belly up and is bursting at the seams then try and react and change it .

Examples..
- The entire school situation in greater Dublin. Houses built, young families moved in, suddenly no schools and panic and chaos ensues. Obviously the schools should have been built FIRST, but heck, in Ireland (apart from T2) building anything that isnt stuffed to the seams on the first day is a waste
- The M50, crap junctions, not wide enough, now costing 100s of millions to fix. And a bit more panic and chaos during the process.
- Cork south ring road: one of the busiest roads in ireland yet it wasnt built with freeflow junctions from the start. Plenty of chaos there too whilst the corkonians suffer the result of building without the necessary capacity from the beginning.

and you could go on and on.
Terminal 2 is a breath of fresh air that it ISNT going to be stuffed to the rafters and needing to be meddled with within a couple of years.

If you have ever experience the new Iberia Terminal in Madrid or the Lufthansa terminal in Munich you'll appreicte what a proper airport is like that isnt as crowed as a Mountjoy prision cell.

but nope.
calcutta conditions bursting at the seams like in Dublin T1 is a much better way to do things.

ilovegermany · 09-07-2010 12:02pm

myhead wrote: »

Cmon forget about the shiney architecture and worry that it will be empty unless we can tempt a major airline to use dublin as a hub. Its madness with a decrease in passengers using dublin airport to build this. The decrease is not helped by the government and airport duties, and yes (Ryanair) boss Michael o Leary is 100% right in this matter. We shall pay for it in the end!

Ireland is about more than RYANAIR. Its a total embarrassment coming into Dublin Airport, its worst than a lot of Airports in third world countries in terms of space, queuing conditions and generally being too small for purpose.

Contrary to Ryanair's assertions the old terminal does not have a 25-30 million capacity - probably more like 12-15 million.

The new terminal offers the capacity for a phased refurbishment of the old terminal and closure of the truly embarrassing bits (Basement check in at Area 14 and better spacing of stands). At the moment Ireland needs a terminal and a half, in ten/fifteen years we'll need 2 fully operating terminals.

We have a total peasant mentality in this country when it comes to infrastructure.

munchkin_utd · 09-07-2010 12:36pm

ilovegermany wrote: »

The new terminal offers the capacity for a phased refurbishment of the old terminal and closure of the truly embarrassing bits (Basement check in at Area 14 and better spacing of stands). At the moment Ireland needs a terminal and a half, in ten/fifteen years we'll need 2 fully operating terminals.

We have a total peasant mentality in this country when it comes to infrastructure.

Funny that. I'd put area 14 down as the most pleasant part of dublin airport currently!!
The main checkin area is so chronically unfit for purpose and overcrowded that its nice to get into the basement where its not so packed and you also have the self service terminals and self service checkin baggage facilities.

I do agree that the current setup is embarassing for ireland as a tourist destination.
Many Irish people think that the only people that use the airport are Irish LEAVING the island going on holidays.
Its not.

Dublin Airport is the first impression of Ireland that millions of visitors get. Imagine paying nearly a thousand euros for a flight from the US to Ireland (which are the current prices for august) and landing to the hovel that is Terminal 1.
And not because of choice. Its because thats the best Ireland has to offer!!!

Its a pure disgrace to the country that will be rectified (for non ryanair customers) when Terminal 2 opens.

Jayuu · 10-07-2010 3:54pm

Just wondering if anybody here who volunteered to be a "test passenger" had heard anything from the DAA. I registered on the site a couple of weeks back but have received nothing since.

eia340600 · 10-07-2010 8:21pm

darkman2 wrote: »

http://www.dublinairportauthority.com/TDA/FAQs/introt2.html

A "tour" of the terminal.

From the off, I've been sceptical about passenger flows in the new terminal.This "tour" only heightens my fears.

For starters, departing passengers have to rise 2 floors after check in for security and shopping, only to have to descend 2 floors again to get to the gates.OR (USA bound passengers) descend 3 floors and rise another.
This is done so that arriving passengers only have one level change.

In the current terminal departing passengers have NO level changes and arriving passengers have one(after getting off the plane).

Not only do passengers have to change floors time and time again, but departing and arriving passengers actually intersect on the 1st floor of the terminal!!Never have I seen this happen outside of tiny regional airports.By the looks of things, departing passengers will have to walk through the ever present crowds of waiting plebs to get to security.

This layout is there because of the "bridge" over the T1 road.However, the roads were re-arranged to suit the new terminal, not the other way round.Therefore the bridge was unnecessary, and a more traditional and more effective terminal could have been designed.

Even if the bridge had to be there, a more flow friendly layout could have been adopted, with arrivals on the ground floor, check-in on the first and security on the 2nd, with the pier layout changed respectively.
Or arrivals on the top with check-in and security below.

In other words there were a million different possibilities that could have been used to design a more user friendly Terminal.I am dubious about T2 in that respect.

I hope I'm wrong, but I think T2 will be an incredibly annoying place to pass through..But I guess I'll have to wait and see...

Plowman · 10-07-2010 10:20pm

This post has been deleted.

irishdub14 · 19-07-2010 4:57pm

Looking Good!

http://www.dublinairportauthority.com/TDA/Image_Bank/t2_construction_gallery.html

Plus a new newsletter:

http://www.dublinairportauthority.com/TDA/Latest_Newsletter/DAAezine2.pdf

runway16 · 20-07-2010 11:47pm

myhead wrote: »

Your simply not understanding, lets be realistic unless we have the people to fill your building its pointless. its cart before the horse as usual in this country. building before planning. lets see how it pans out, I wish it to work out but im not holding my breath.:rolleyes:

With all due respect, I work in a senior position in the airlines at Dublin airport and I can tell you for fact that the current terminal is already over capacity and has been for a very long time. There just is not enough space at Dublin airport for a variety of functions essential to the proper running of the airport.

There arent enough aircraft parking stands
There arent enough Passport control facilities.
The Baggage system is below spec and is stretched.
The US immigration facility gets DANGEROUSLY overcrowded.
The Boarding gates at Pier A and B were designed for smaller aircraft and lower loads and are not big enough for the throughput being experienced.
Pier A is not fulfilling current security regulations and is only being allowed to operate with derogation because there isnt enough room anywhere else.
Facilities for staff are awful, there is not enough room for ramp equipment because of squeezing everything into too small a space.

I could go on and on....

All of a sudden it has become fashionable to slam everything built for the future in this country on the grounds of being a waste. The same people were usually the ones complaining when we under specified infrastructure in the past.

Airports have to be build ahead of demand because of the long lead in times otherwise you get years of the sort of congestion we once had at the airport. If a fire had broken out in that building in the height of summer, a lot of people would have died due to the crushing levels of congestion.

Forget O'leary. He has an agenda to frustrate Aer Lingus's Growth plans and make as much trouble for the government because he hasnt got his way.

T1 would burst at 30 million pax. It was bursting at 22 million for god sake. Dublin added an extra 4 million pax in one year in 2007. The need is there, but of course the bog mentality that just loves to complain about everything knows better....

JupiterKid · 21-07-2010 2:59am

runway16 wrote: »

With all due respect, I work in a senior position in the airlines at Dublin airport and I can tell you for fact that the current terminal is already over capacity and has been for a very long time. There just is not enough space at Dublin airport for a variety of functions essential to the proper running of the airport.

There arent enough aircraft parking stands
There arent enough Passport control facilities.
The Baggage system is below spec and is stretched.
The US immigration facility gets DANGEROUSLY overcrowded.
The Boarding gates at Pier A and B were designed for smaller aircraft and lower loads and are not big enough for the throughput being experienced.
Pier A is not fulfilling current security regulations and is only being allowed to operate with derogation because there isnt enough room anywhere else.
Facilities for staff are awful, there is not enough room for ramp equipment because of squeezing everything into too small a space.

I could go on and on....

All of a sudden it has become fashionable to slam everything built for the future in this country on the grounds of being a waste. The same people were usually the ones complaining when we under specified infrastructure in the past.

Airports have to be build ahead of demand because of the long lead in times otherwise you get years of the sort of congestion we once had at the airport. If a fire had broken out in that building in the height of summer, a lot of people would have died due to the crushing levels of congestion.

Forget O'leary. He has an agenda to frustrate Aer Lingus's Growth plans and make as much trouble for the government because he hasnt got his way.

T1 would burst at 30 million pax. It was bursting at 22 million for god sake. Dublin added an extra 4 million pax in one year in 2007. The need is there, but of course the bog mentality that just loves to complain about everything knows better....

Well said. I completely agree. T2 is very much needed and it is needed now. The only quibble I have about T2 was the fact that Pier C - itself only built in 1999/2000 - was demolished to make way for T2. That was atrocious planning and a huge waste of money.

runway16 · 21-07-2010 4:24pm

JupiterKid wrote: »

Well said. I completely agree. T2 is very much needed and it is needed now. The only quibble I have about T2 was the fact that Pier C - itself only built in 1999/2000 - was demolished to make way for T2. That was atrocious planning and a huge waste of money.

I agree with you about Pier C, but I think it was Pier C that was the mistake and not T2. When Pier C was built, it was built to the wrong design (it should have been sited where Pier E is being built), it was too narrow, and it needed its own check in / arrivals facilities. T2's location really corrects what went wrong when Pier C was built.

I still believe T2 isnt ambitious enough, and that a new terminal site with one large terminal should have been developed at west lands.

But try convincing the new breed of "we dont need its" and "its a waste of moneys" and "but O'leary says its bad" people that seem to have sprung up all over the country since the Recession.

spacetweek · 21-07-2010 8:52pm

myhead wrote:

Your simply not understanding, lets be realistic unless we have the people to fill your building its pointless. its cart before the horse as usual in this country. building before planning.

Incredible that there are still people who don't understand building for the future.
T2 isn't building before planning; it's building *as a result of* planning. It's rare example of it in this country (the motorways being another) and please let's not have it bashed or (in your case) misrecognised.

We'll have the people to fill the building within the next decade or two. The corrollary of this is that we won't have to have any construction up at the airport for another decade or two - which is great news.

runway16 wrote: »

I agree with you about Pier C, but I think it was Pier C that was the mistake and not T2. When Pier C was built, it was built to the wrong design (it should have been sited where Pier E is being built), it was too narrow, and it needed its own check in / arrivals facilities. T2's location really corrects what went wrong when Pier C was built.

Although I agree that Pier C was built wrongly, I don't agree that it should have been left there on the grounds that it was only 10 years old. When something is wrong, you fix it; you don't leave it there. If you leave it there, it just goes on being a problem for years and years. The works for T2 were so big that the replacement of C gets lost in the haze anyway.

murpho999 · 21-07-2010 11:35pm

myhead wrote: »

Your simply not understanding, lets be realistic unless we have the people to fill your building its pointless. its cart before the horse as usual in this country. building before planning. lets see how it pans out, I wish it to work out but im not holding my breath.:rolleyes:

Jaysis I hate this attitude.

So if it was up to you. Stick with the old terminal with packed check in areas, often long security queues etc, wait for the economy to turn around and passenger numbers to turn around in say 5 years time, then discover that Terminal 1 can't cope. Go through design, planning and construction of T2, say another 5 years, so in around 2020 we could have a building fit for the numbers.

Remember this building was planned and committed to during the boom, when T1 was really struggling, and this recession, although serious and deep, will not last forever and things will some day turn around, and now for once we will have a major piece of infrastructure that is ready for that pick up.

Also, a recession is a time to do these projects, not only for future planning but it creates employment but also Government can get better value for money as prices for tenders become more competitive.

murpho999 · 21-07-2010 11:40pm

eia340600 wrote: »

From the off, I've been sceptical about passenger flows in the new terminal.This "tour" only heightens my fears.

For starters, departing passengers have to rise 2 floors after check in for security and shopping, only to have to descend 2 floors again to get to the gates.OR (USA bound passengers) descend 3 floors and rise another.
This is done so that arriving passengers only have one level change.

In the current terminal departing passengers have NO level changes and arriving passengers have one(after getting off the plane).

Not only do passengers have to change floors time and time again, but departing and arriving passengers actually intersect on the 1st floor of the terminal!!Never have I seen this happen outside of tiny regional airports.By the looks of things, departing passengers will have to walk through the ever present crowds of waiting plebs to get to security.

This layout is there because of the "bridge" over the T1 road.However, the roads were re-arranged to suit the new terminal, not the other way round.Therefore the bridge was unnecessary, and a more traditional and more effective terminal could have been designed.

Even if the bridge had to be there, a more flow friendly layout could have been adopted, with arrivals on the ground floor, check-in on the first and security on the 2nd, with the pier layout changed respectively.
Or arrivals on the top with check-in and security below.

In other words there were a million different possibilities that could have been used to design a more user friendly Terminal.I am dubious about T2 in that respect.

I hope I'm wrong, but I think T2 will be an incredibly annoying place to pass through..But I guess I'll have to wait and see...

Really don't see what the problem is with changing levels, up and down an escalator a couple of times what is the problem?

Your point about intersecting Departing and Arriving passengers is wrong. This happens in major international airports quite often, Schiphol being a perfect example.
Don't see the problem with it. Departing people are heading for their gates and arrivees are heading for baggage/passport control. Do not see how it will cause a problem.

L1011 · 22-07-2010 12:13am

Ah now, Schiphol is not a model anywhere should aspire to...

murpho999 · 22-07-2010 12:37am

MYOB wrote: »

Ah now, Schiphol is not a model anywhere should aspire to...

Why not? It's a pretty easy airport to get in and out of, no means perfect, for me some walks to gates, especially Aer Lingus' is very long, and they often don't have enough Immigration Police on the desks, leading to longer queues than there should be, but apart from that it's a nice airport, that works, and is generally pleasant to be in.

KC61 · 22-07-2010 9:38am

The same happens in Frankfurt and Barcelona as well.

irishdub14 · 22-07-2010 10:29am

New Article on T2:

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/inside-the-controversial-terminal-2-as-it-gets-ready-for-takeoff-2267945.html?start=2

How is it Controversial??

Plowman · 22-07-2010 10:38am

This post has been deleted.

Craig Fay · 22-07-2010 12:17pm

irishdub14 wrote: »

New Article on T2:

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/inside-the-controversial-terminal-2-as-it-gets-ready-for-takeoff-2267945.html?start=2

From that:
"And, should the upturn arrive, there is space for a further pier to be added to cater for those jet-setting generations of the future."

I thought one of the planning conditions was that they couldn't the expand the terminal?

Plowman · 22-07-2010 1:13pm

This post has been deleted.

Craig Fay · 22-07-2010 1:41pm

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I didn't mean in regards to space, but thought I seen here that ABP made it one of the conditions on granting planning permission.

df1985 · 22-07-2010 6:48pm

darkman2 wrote: »

http://www.dublinairportauthority.com/TDA/FAQs/introt2.html

A "tour" of the terminal.

good video to see the terminal but christ some of the cheesy stuffy yer man was coming out with was cringeworthy!

runway16 · 22-07-2010 9:09pm

murpho999 wrote: »

Really don't see what the problem is with changing levels, up and down an escalator a couple of times what is the problem?

Your point about intersecting Departing and Arriving passengers is wrong. This happens in major international airports quite often, Schiphol being a perfect example.
Don't see the problem with it. Departing people are heading for their gates and arrivees are heading for baggage/passport control. Do not see how it will cause a problem.

Security regulations require that departing and arriving passengers do not mix in the airside portion of the terminal (ie beyond security control). AMSTERDAM gets away with it, like Pier A in Dublin, because it is an older design, but no new facility can allow it.

The only point in T2 where they will mix is landside, after the 1st escalator up from check in, where the departing pax will quickly ascend to the next level, so it is not an issue in this case.

Ghall · 22-07-2010 9:15pm

Looking forward to seeing the new terminal open, hoping to fly out to Orlando later in the year from T2.

Jayuu · 22-07-2010 10:16pm

The US immigration control will be a huge advantage in Terminal 2 as well.
Lets face it, nobody minds doing all that stuff at the start of the journey when you're all excited about going away as opposed to the other side when you're tired and you just want to get to your destination.

Dublin Airport - Terminal 2

Comments